Which creatinine and cystatin C equations can be reliably used in children?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Estimation of GFR in children is challenging; reference methods are cumbersome, and formulas have limitations. The aims of this study were to evaluate (1) the new creatinine-based formula recently proposed by Schwartz using a kinetic colorimetric compensated Jaffe technique; (2) some cystatin C-derived formulas (Hoek, Le Bricon, Larsson, Rule, Filler, and Zappitelli) using a nephelemetric technique; and (3) combined formulas using both cystatin and creatinine (Zappitelli and Bouvet). DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS These formulas were evaluated in a cross-sectional cohort of 252 children with moderate CKD or normal GFR, in comparison with the reference standard (inulin clearance, iGFR). Mean age, body weight, height, creatinine, and cystatin C were 10.7 ± 4.0 years, 35 ± 15 kg, 137 ± 20 cm, 55 ± 30 μmol/L, and 0.91 ± 0.35 mg/L, respectively. RESULTS Mean ± SD iGFR was 101 ± 32 ml/min per 1.73 m². When evaluating agreement between these formulas and iGFR (e.g. correlation, Bland Altman plots, bias, and accuracies), there was a good correlation between iGFR and all Le Bricon, Larsson, Rule, and Zappitelli (both) and locally adapted Schwartz and 2009 Schwartz formulas; by contrast, Filler and original 1976 Schwartz formulas overestimated iGFR, whereas Hoek and Bouvet formulas underestimated iGFR. CONCLUSION Different cystatin C-derived formulas (at least Larsson and Le Bricon) for estimating GFR as well as the Zappitelli combined formula are accurate in addition to the new Schwartz bedside formula in a general pediatric population.